Crypt card redesign

BenPeal wrote:

BenPeal wrote:

I propose the following terminology:

Keyword: Remains not defined in the rules. Just a general term in gaming.
Atttibute: Only refers to the attribute bar, where clan, discipline, and Advanced icons are displayed.
Terms: Only refers to the proposed result of a successful referendum.
Trait: All of the keywords, such as Black Hand, Seraph, mortal, ghoul, animal and Gehenna. Also includes "special traits", which are those listed in the "special terms" section of the rulebook (simply renaming "special term" to "special trait").

Note that by these definitions, things like "+1 strength" and "+1 intercept" are not traits. They remain abilities provided to a vampire in its card text.

Perhaps things like "+1 strength" and "+1 intercept" could be defined as "simple abilities". Thoughts?

Actually, I always thought it was already the case
.
Nonetheless, this is still unnecessary complicated to me. Why do you need to create categories for things that have nothing to do together and are already defined separately ?
Besides, what's the point of dissociating traits and keyword, when you use keyword in trait's definition ?


I think we only need 1 word. Call it trait, keyword or attribute, but in the end they are all the same. It refers to nominal information likely to generate game interaction.

Thus game information on crypt cards are constituted of :
- Trait/keyword/attribute
- Abilities
- Disciplines/Nondisciplinesthatworksjustlikedisciplines/Virtues
Along with name and grouping.

Ankha wrote:

The other thing is that if we get a clear picture of how a trait and ability are different, we may find out a rule to display them in a logical way in the textbox.

Like I said :

Abilities = sentences. (and +X bonus count as a sentence, since it's only the condensed form of "Y has +X.")

Trait = word(s).

666Raziel wrote:

BenPeal wrote:

BenPeal wrote:

I propose the following terminology:

Keyword: Remains not defined in the rules. Just a general term in gaming.
Atttibute: Only refers to the attribute bar, where clan, discipline, and Advanced icons are displayed.
Terms: Only refers to the proposed result of a successful referendum.
Trait: All of the keywords, such as Black Hand, Seraph, mortal, ghoul, animal and Gehenna. Also includes "special traits", which are those listed in the "special terms" section of the rulebook (simply renaming "special term" to "special trait").

Note that by these definitions, things like "+1 strength" and "+1 intercept" are not traits. They remain abilities provided to a vampire in its card text.

Perhaps things like "+1 strength" and "+1 intercept" could be defined as "simple abilities". Thoughts?

Actually, I always thought it was already the case

It is not already the case.
.

Nonetheless, this is still unnecessary complicated to me. Why do you need to create categories for things that have nothing to do together and are already defined separately ?

They're not already properly defined, which is why I'm proposing definitions.

Besides, what's the point of dissociating traits and keyword, when you use keyword in trait's definition?

It was the easiest way in the time I had before I went to lunch to define "trait" without using the words "term" or "attribute".

I think we only need 1 word. Call it trait, keyword or attribute, but in the end they are all the same. It refers to nominal information likely to generate game interaction.

Thus game information on crypt cards are constituted of :
- Trait/keyword/attribute
- Abilities
- Disciplines/Nondisciplinesthatworksjustlikedisciplines/Virtues
Along with name and grouping.

That's what I want as well. Er, except I'm not sure whether Flight should be simply a trait in the crypt text box with its accompanying symbol, or whether the Flight symbol should go in the attribute bar. Thoughts?

BenPeal wrote:

That's what I want as well. Er, except I'm not sure whether Flight should be simply a trait in the crypt text box with its accompanying symbol, or whether the Flight symbol should go in the attribute bar. Thoughts?

Personally, I think that the Flight Icon is something we should get rid of. Just keep the word in the crypt textbox (in the same template as any other traits) and add "Requires a minion with Flight" on library cards.

(BTW, I think something similar should be done about Striga and Malefica. In my opinion they should have been worded like Aye and Orun.)

666Raziel wrote:

Ankha wrote:

The other thing is that if we get a clear picture of how a trait and ability are different, we may find out a rule to display them in a logical way in the textbox.

Like I said :

Abilities = sentences. (and +X bonus count as a sentence, since it's only the condensed form of "Y has +X.")

Trait = word(s).

Sorry if I'm hammering , but what I like about my proposition is that it works very nice with Ke's layout.

Traits goes in the black box (and we now have a good reason tu fully write the clan's name there).

Abilities goes in the white box.
(As for vampire without abilities ... well, so far we haven't seen how it would look if a vampire had only a black box or an empty white box...)



About grouping, I thought the number could be added to the clan icon. Like that, we keep the historical position and displaying of the clan's icon, but we merge it with deckbuilding information. (Which is now remove from gametext space.)


EDIT : this would also be consistent to many library cards since most of them have traits in the black box and abilities in the white one.